Sunday, September 16, 2012

A Book Review of Holfstadter, R. & Metzger, W. P. (1955). The Development of Academic Freedom in the United States. New York, NY: Columbia University.

The
Development of Academic Freedom in the United States
is an analytical history of the concept of freedom and a chronological
narrative of the development of the concept academic freedom.Holfstadter and Metger engage in a conceptual
analysis of freedom in the circles of America academics by asking:(a) what it meant to successive generations
of academic men; (b) to what extent they have achieved it; and (c) what factors
in academics itself, as well as in American culture at large, have created and
sustained it.In a nutshell, the authors
inquire as to why freedom exists and why it has been limited (p.
x).

According
to Holfstadter and Metger The Development of Academic Freedom in the United
States is the first part of Columbia University’s The American Academic
Freedom Project, directed by Robert M. MacIver, a project that consists of
two parts:(1) a historical survey of
the rise, development, and vicissitudes of academic freedom; and, (2) an
analysis of the contemporary situation and a study of the problems it presents,
against a background designed to bring out the significance of academic freedom
and its relation to the society in which we live.

As
a reflection of good scholarship and awareness of broadness of topic,
Holfstadter and Metger make their delimitations known by defining what it is
that they are studying.They are
concerned with the concept and construct freedom within college and
university education, primarily with the academic freedom of faculty members
and students’ freedom is integrated only when it converges with faculty
freedom; however, they opt to provide the reader with pointers to some
important resources that cover aspects that they did not cover in this work.

Structurally,
the book is divided in two parts:(a)
the age of the college, an age marked by religious and theological questions;
and, (b) the age of the university, an age marked by a high preoccupation with
science and social problems.Stylistically, the authors advance their analysis in a chronological
fashion from pre-reformation to post-reformation intellectual history.The use of the Reformation as the reference
point from which the history of academic freedom is to be seen constitutes a
good indication of how the authors view Christianity as a major player in
understanding academic freedom.The book
is a history of the development of academic freedom within a theoretical
framework of Christian history, theology, and dogma.As an indication of the central role of
Christianity in understanding academic freedom since the medieval times,
Holfstadter and Metger (p. 12) argue that “the intellectual freedom of the
medieval scholar existed within the framework of an authoritative system of
faith upheld by vigilant positive authority” and they argue that an
understanding of academic freedom must take into account the contextual
frameworks of its time.They rally for
an exegetical study of history and posit the following:

Since it is
our purpose to enter sympathetically into the spirit of the medieval academic
experience and understand the function of the medieval university from the
point of view of its period, it is necessary to take from the moment a relative
view, accepting as given the medieval frameworks of ideas.(p. 12)

The
authors invite the reader to recognize the difference between historical
periods since they set the platform for the development of the concept academic
freedom, to recognize the difference between the various constructs of
freedom as used in each phase of the development of the idea of academic
freedom, and to take into account the forces at work in the intellectual sphere
as history unfolded.The chronology of
intellectual or academic freedom advances with a background of Christian
dogmatisms (in which heresy was defined as departure from the Catholic
Christian worldview) of the pre-reformation era, a background of humanism during
the renaissance and reformation era, and later a background of religious
freedom and consequent denominationalism in the United States.

I
agree with the authors’ choice to start with the early developments of academic
freedom in order to establish a foundation for a better and thorough
understanding of the “nature of the beast.”The plight for Academic freedom in America can be better appreciated
when the complex developmental history is seen in perspective.When denominationalism and sectarianism are seen
as major players to both promote and discourage academic freedom, one can only
begin to wonder whether freedom is desired because it is a right of all
citizens or if it is desirable because it serves selfish or group interests.This is a paradox surrounding academic
freedom, whether one studies it within the religious framework of sectarianism
and denominationalism or the political framework of democracy.Michael Perko, discussing about red-hunts and
the communist saga in the United States, asserts the following:

In times when
academic freedom is not challenged, academic leadership is in support of it;
however, in times when it is challenged leadership rolls over it.During the times of the red-hunts, membership
in the communist party constituted a ground for expulsion from, exclusion, or
non-acceptance into a faculty position.(Lecture on American Higher Education, Loyola University of Chicago,
2003)

One
aspect that deserves negative criticism in Holfstadter and Metger that caught
my attention is their discussion of Thomas Clap (pp. 163-177).The authors depart from their methodology and
ethics as historians to subjective critiques of a historical man.Clap is characterized by negative attributes
in an obviously subjective manner rather than placed in the book as an actor
meriting attention for his position as a leader who reflected a particular
sectarian dogmatism and influenced academic freedom in his time.The authors’ passionate yet negative
discussion of Clap tinted, unnecessarily, what would otherwise be a near-perfect
piece of work.Despite the authors’
initial refrain from polemics, they end up raising a polemic in this section,
particularly for those who would see Clap’s contribution and behavior in a
different way.

Holfstadter
and Metger close the book in a mixed tone of both encouragement and
despair.‘Encouragement’ because the
understanding of academic freedom has evolved to reach more sophisticated
infrastructures and support systems and ‘despair’ because unless one is
assertive enough the infrastructures and support systems are of no avail.The authors posit,

In the
present climate of opinion, these factors are not sufficient to give courage to
the circumspect or timid, but they provide a considerable measure of security
for professors who have the hardihood to assert themselves.(p. 506)

And,

No
one can follow the history of academic freedom in this country without
wondering at the fact that any society … should possess the vision to subsidize
free criticism and inquiry, and … one cannot but be appalled at the slender
thread by which it hangs … one cannot but be disheartened by the cowardice and
self-deception that frail men use who want to be both safe and free.With such conflicting evidence, perhaps
individual temperament alone tips the balance toward confidence or
despair.(p. 506)

An
understanding of this complexity and conflict is important even today.This book is relevant to the current society
and provides a framework from which to understand today’s struggles with the
paradox found in the relationship between democracy and academic freedom in
higher education in the United States and abroad.To what extent is academic freedom truly
freedom and if there is any state of nirvana in the issue of academic
freedom is a question that can be asked under any system of government.This is indeed a must-read for those who are
interested in higher education history, academics, and educational politics in
general.

About Me

To describe oneself is to make oneself susceptible to the foolishness that there is such a thing as knowing oneself. As an African, I have come to the realization that defining oneself is impossible without a definition of those who bring meaning to existence--A mhunu i mhunu ka vhanu. If you want to know who I am, you will have to look at the two most beautiful people (in and out) who surround me, my wife and my daughter; look at those whose influence has been remarkable in my life; then, look at yourself and how you fit in my journey. It is a reflection of all of you that makes who I am.